Sam took her handbag to Leather Healer Ltd ("LH Ltd"), a company that specialize in leather repair. Tom, the sales assistant did not inform Sam of the Terms and Conditions displayed on the wall, nor did she notice the terms as Sam did not have her glasses with her. Sam was asked to sign a receipt and she was told by Tom that LH Ltd would not accept liability for certain risks, including scratches to buckles and damage to zips. Sam signed the receipt without reading. In fact, the receipt included the following condition:

"Goods accepted for repair on the condition that the company [LH LTD] will not liable for any damage however arising or for any delay caused".

Sam also wanted to buy a leather cleaning kit from the shop. She heard that there is a good leather cleaning kit manufactured by a company from Spain and asked Tom for it. Tom said the shop did not have such product, but he can sell it to her in his own capacity as he bought several sets of cleaning kit when he went to Spain for his holiday (This is not true. Tom never went to Spain and the cleaning kit is actually manufactured in Cambodia). He offered the kit to her at $399, which is the price for the leather cleaning kit if it is manufactured by the company in Spain. Tom informed Sam that the cleaning kit is Made in Spain (you can assume the terms were all stated clearly), and Sam accepted his offer. Sam paid $399 in return for the cleaning kit and went home.

When she got home and tried to use the cleaning kit for her leather shoes, the solution damaged her shoes as it contained a corrosive ingredient which is not suitable for cleaning leather.

A week later, the handbag was returned with a stain on it. The stain was not there when she dropped it off at LH Ltd. LH Ltd sought to rely on the exclusion clause on the receipt.

Advise Sam as to her rights against Tom and LH Ltd.